The book of Exodus begins with the words “These are the names of the sons of Israel who went down to Egypt” (Exodus 1:1). This opener becomes the basis for Hebrew title of the book “These are the names”. The book begins with one of those generational lists that punctuate Genesis so demonstrating continuity.
Multiplication
We are told that there were 70 that went down to Egypt. This could have a symbolic element to it as 70 becomes representative of perfection, the number of the nations, Sanhedrin and of the translators of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. Perhaps, alternatively this is the foundation for the symbolism.[1] The point though is that the Hebrews start as a small number when they arrive in Egypt at the end of Genesis but have grown mighty in number by now (1:7). God’s creation mandate to fill and subdue the earth (Genesis 1:26-28) is being fulfilled as also is his promise to Abraham to make a mighty nation from him (Genesis 12:1-3).
Exile
However, there are two problems right at the start of the book. If the promise to Abraham was a people, under God’s rule and blessing, living in God’s place or land then only one out of the three is being fulfilled. The people are not in the place that God has promised the (Canaan). It is worth recalling that leaving the land and going down to Egypt was not considered a positive in Genesis. Abram had brought great trouble by seeking refuge from famine and lying about Sarai, his wife being his sister. However, the exile to Egypt had been prophesied by God when making his covenant promise. There would be a 400 year period echoed later by the 400 years of silence prior to Christ’s coming. Moreover, there had been no choice for Joseph who had been sold as a captive into slavery in Egypt.
This is relevant to contemporary discussions and controversies. Dominion Theology or the Seven Mountain Mandate talks about our ability to influence this world and take power with one book on the theme entitled “Invading Babylon: The seven-mountain mandate.” However, we see in the Old Testament that God’s people find themselves in Egypt and later Babylon against their will. Exile is forced and that is the context in which we today find ourselves, longing to be at home with the Lord (not merely going to heaven but present in his new creation under his rule and reign). In the meantime, we find ourselves in exile against our desire. That is the context in which we are told to seek the good of the city in which we find ourselves
Persecuted
Secondly, rather than experiencing God’s rule; his provision, protection and blessing, the Israelites find themselves under the harsh authoritarian rule of a new Pharoah. It is possible that it is not just the passage of time that means he has forgotten Joseph but also that he belongs to a different dynasty to the Pharoah of Joseph’s day. The NIV’s wording “ to whom Joseph meant nothing,” makes good sense of the language of forgetting (1:8).
The King fears the Hebrews and so has a twofold strategy for dealing with them. First, he forces them to work for him as slaves building his cities (1:8-14). The intent is to make life bitter for them, a hostile environment if you like. This will later lead to a dilemma. The Egyptian regime wanted rid of the Israelites and perhaps by making life harsh, they hoped to encourage them to leave and migrate back to Canaan. However, the king and country quickly become economically dependent on the slaves. As our sidenote, we cannot avoid the similarities with modern immigration policies and controversies.
The taking of Israelites as slaves would fit with a picture where according to Kitchen,
“For over 350 years (CA/ 1540-1170, from their conquest and repeated campaigns in Canaan and Syria, Egtpys kings brought back batches of prisoners regularly, sometimes in considerable numbers. Besides domestic, cultic and artisanal duties as before, the new accessions of manpower were employed to cultivate land, and could be used in building projects. In brick making the most famous comes from a scene in the tomb chapel of the vizier Rekhmire of circa 1450.” (Kitchner, on the Reliability of the Old Testament), 247.
Secondly, he seeks to commit genocide by killing the baby boys, an action that will later be echoed by Herod’s attempts to eliminate Jesus. If Herod sought to rely on the Magi for help, Pharoah was dependent on the Israelite midwives who refused to cooperate. Their explanation that they are not able to keep up with the speed of delivery of Hebrew boys should not be seen as a deception. Rather, this is defiant humour. “Come on, we cannot possibly kill those baby boys.” They are mocking the king . God blesses the midwives and Pharoah attempts a new strategy by ordering baby boys to be murdered by being thrown into the Nile. What this does is force his evil into the open. He won’t be able to blame the midwives and hide behind possible mishaps in delivery (1:15-18). In recent years we have seen a shift in what might be described as a “culture of death” here in the UK. Whilst unpleasant and wicked, something to be resisted, we may recognise that the move to unrestricted abortion to birth and attempts to justify gender selective abortion brings this evil more into the open. Similarly, we have heard increasingly overt arguments for euthanasia on the basis that older and ill people are a burden on society.
Conclusion
Exile is closely associated with death in the Old Testament. In fact, exile may be seen as a form of death. Adam and Eve are exiled from Eden whilst physical death is an exile from the ground on which we live itself. Egypt becomes a paradigm for this World under judgement. Pharoah’s actions in seeking to destroy Israel is an attempt at de-creation. This is particularly seen in the methodology of drowning in the Nile. The river was seen as the source of life and a god to Egypt but becomes the demon of death to Israel. Watery destruction represents judgement and decreation as seen in the Genesis flood.[2] Secondly it stands for the condition of unbelievers. Outside of Christ we are dead in our sin and slaves to sin.
Thirdly, Egypt is a paradigm for the experience of God’s people in exile. The exile to Babylon may be considered a second Egypt experience and so a second Exodus is promised. The New Testament paradigm is that we are scattered exiles, in the world but not of it.[3]
[1] Alexander advises caution but suggests that Israel may be seen as “a microcosm corrssponding to the entire world” Alexander, Exodus, 38.
[2] See Enns, Exodus, 43-44.
[3] See 1 Peter 1.
Faithroots 